Ludwig Wittgenstein was an interesting chap and well worth reading,
although he only published one book during his lifetime. We could probably describe him as highbrow
without too much argument.
Ludwig Wittgenstein - Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1921)
But suppose we compare him with someone more popular, more accessible and less obviously highbrow. Novelist Edith Wharton for example.
But that was always his way: the least little fragment of
fact was enough for him to transform into a palace of dreams, whereas if he
tried to grasp more of it at a time it remained on his hands as so much
unusable reality.
Edith Wharton - The Gods Arrive (1932)
To my mind Edith Wharton was more broadly astute than Wittgenstein,
with wider insights into the human condition. Her novels bring that out even
though they are of course fiction. Yet in an important sense there is no
such thing as fiction because even fiction is rooted in a language and a reality any reader must understand.
Wittgenstein's ideas tended to be too theoretical for him to bother with certain
insights which are there to be grasped by most of us. He refined his thinking too
far, pared away too much in a passionate quest for ultimate truth which he
never actually achieved. In later years he seemed to gravitate towards
viewpoints which were almost mundane and perhaps this too reflects a reality
where the human condition is essentially mundane. Easily grasped but easily
evaded too - for various reasons.
Popular isn’t necessarily shallow and does not necessarily
occupy some lower sphere of human insight. Even now we are too hierarchical in
our ideas and our thinking and the drawback of that is obvious. Too many
experts go beyond their expertise.
I've lived long enough to doubt whether any real good ever came of sacrificing beautiful facts to even more beautiful theories.
Edith Wharton - The Quicksand (1902)
I've lived long enough to doubt whether any real good ever came of sacrificing beautiful facts to even more beautiful theories.
Edith Wharton - The Quicksand (1902)
6 comments:
I've never really got to grips with Wittgenstein. He seems to have had a huge ability to concentrate, but to lack the awareness of what it was we really should be concentrating on. A very German trait.
A couple of years back I was wandering through a cemetery in Cambridge and found a flat, plain slab flush with the ground, covered with leaves. I cleared them off, wondering who had such a simple grave. And it was him; just the name and dates. Somehow fitting.
On the other hand, I wish every journalist and BBC hack would reflect on his first proposition :"whereof I do not know, thereof I cannot speak"
Oh heck...please, please don't mention Melvyn Bragg...
The return to the mundane: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6j98ksABPMs
Sam - yes he did lack awareness of what we should be concentrating on. Still interesting and insightful but ultimately not successful.
Graeme - the BBC would have to close down if that ever happened.
Scrobs - Melvyn Bragg? Oh yes I remember - Melvyn Bragg. Wasn't Melvyn Bragg on a TV programme about Melvyn Bragg?
Sackers - so that's it, I never searched for my oxen. Oh well - too late now.
Love it, Mr H!
Post a Comment